COTUIT CHARTER CHATTER: Status quo and hell, no

Edward F. Maroney

Tuesday

Apr 29, 2008 at 2:00 AMApr 29, 2008 at 11:55 AM

For a little village, Cotuit has a lot to say. On April 24, the charter commission’s road show settled into Freedom Hall and heard calls for a change to a mayoral form of government alongside praise for the existing system.

For a little village, Cotuit has a lot to say.

On April 24, the charter commission’s road show settled into Freedom Hall and heard calls for a change to a mayoral form of government alongside praise for the existing system.

The 25 villagers in attendance heard also a challenging statement from neighbor Mimi McConnell, read in her absence (due to illness) by Bob Franey.

McConnell called for a committee that would serve as a ombudsman for townspeople, responsible for “looking into any questions brought by the public that are considered to be legitimate, and not frivolous, on such matters as: the conduct of elected officials as well as employees of the Town; funding or other decisions that may have prejudicial or unduly influenced by overt or hidden pressures, including appointments to Town boards or committees; collusion on projects or legislation that are not in the best interests of our Town.”

This “Accountability Committee, the Public Interest Committee, the Ombudsman Committee,” McConnell wrote, “would serve notice on officials, and others, who might otherwise be persuaded to serve their own or others’ self-interest. It is disconcerting to learn that the public trust has been abused in some instances over the past several years in a Town that has been served, in the main, by faithful and honest individuals.”

McConnell was among the first class of councilors elected in 1989. Reaping sufficient votes for a four-year term, she was six months into the job when council president Paul Lebel resigned and she succeeded him in that role. In 1991, she was diagnosed with breast cancer and stepped down, though she continued to serve as a water commissioner and as executive director of the Coalition for Buzzards Bay.

Reached at home, McConnell said her statement was prompted by knowledge that “some town residents who are in a watchdog mode feel that there is a cabal who orchestrate upcoming votes and who generate supportive funds for their campaigns and then are under the gun to deliver.”

She said it’s important “for everybody to know that there is public scrutiny and public concern. I think we need some sunshine on this.”

McConnell said she’s aware that “it would be difficult to appoint a committee that would be totally qualified and willing to serve. Conflict of interest would have to be avoided.” Having the town council do the appointing, she said, “automatically represents a conflict of interest.”

Contacted by e-mail, Council President Janet Joakim wrote that she had only seen a part of the meeting. “I have not heard this idea, and am not sure what the context is, what the implications are, and what the challenges would be.

“We do have a state ethics committee who are consulted regularly and we oft see members of boards and committees recuse themselves -- in some cases we need to consider whether some members find (they need) to recuse too often. Unfortunately we don't get enough applications to committees and boards, but we are working on outreach and other ideas to find people to serve on boards and committees.

“Although I am not clear what the charge would be for such a committee, I would wonder how its membership would be chosen in a way that those with concerns would feel they could trust the committee. With every concern, there is always someone who has a counter concern.

“I trust that our charter commission will consider all of the ideas that come before them and will present the voters of the town with a full slate of well-thought and closely considered options.”

Accountability Central to Speakers

Speaker after speaker at last week’s meeting, regardless of position on the questions of an elected chief executive or village versus at-large councilors, sounded the theme of accountability.

“I believe in a strong mayor and a (smaller) council (elected) at large,” said Diane Fay, who suggested the council could be empowered to reverse the mayor’s decisions by a two-thirds vote. The charter could be written, she said, to allow voters to remove the mayor two years into his or her term if they desired.

On the other hand, “We have to think about what’s been done right with the charter,” said Stew Goodwin, president of the village civic association. “There’s quite a bit right.” Goodwin and others pointed to the town’s bond ratings as emblematic of this success.

If changes are recommended by the commission, Goodwin said, he hopes they will be presented in a menu fashion so that voters can chose which to support.

Admitting “I do not have a solution for you,” King Lowe protested recent appearances by councilors before boards they have appointed, and the way councilors “browbeat” some candidates for boards during the appointment process.

Charter commission member Roy Richardson, former chair of the town council’s appointment committee, described the give-and-take that goes on between councilors and committee members. He recalled discussions with the planning board, which is charged with advancing zoning proposals for ultimate council approval.

Dropping in from Marstons Mills, Al Baker, a sparkplug of the effort to gather thousands of signatures for a charter commission, reminded the commissioners that many people had voted to kick the tires of town government.

“It never hurts to check your oil,” he said. “You need the maintenance. If it’s fine, you leave it alone. If not, you fix it.”

[Read the full story in Friday’s Barnstable Patriot]

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.